4.6 Article

WNT10A Plays an Oncogenic Role in Renal Cell Carcinoma by Activating WNT/β-catenin Pathway

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 7, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047649

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Council [NSC100-2320-B-016-010-]
  2. Tri-Service General Hospital [TSGH-C98-04, TSGH-C98-10-S01, TSGH-C99-004, TSGH-C99-146, TSGH-C99-009-10-S01, TSGH-C100-135, TSGH-C100-007-009-10-S01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a malignancy with poor prognosis. WNT/beta-catenin signaling dysregulation, especially beta-catenin overactivation and WNT antagonist silencing, is associated with RCC carcinogenesis and progression. However, the role of WNT ligands in RCC has not yet been determined. We screened 19 WNT ligands from normal kidney and RCC cell lines and tissues and found that WNT10A was significantly increased in RCC cell lines and tissues as compared to that in normal controls. The clinical significance of increase in WNT10A was evaluated by performing an immunohistochemical association study in a 19-year follow-up cohort comprising 284 RCC and 267 benign renal disease (BRD) patients. The results of this study showed that WNT10A was dramatically upregulated in RCC tissues as compared to that in BRD tissues. This result suggests that WNT10A, nuclear beta-catenin, and nuclear cyclin D1 act as independent risk factors for RCC carcinogenesis and progression, with accumulative risk effects. Molecular validation of cell line models with gain- or loss-of-function designs showed that forced WNT10A expression induced RCC cell proliferation and aggressiveness, including higher chemoresistance, cell migration, invasiveness, and cell transformation, due to the activation of beta-catenin-dependent signaling. Conversely, WNT10A siRNA knockdown decreased cell proliferation and aggressiveness of RCC cells. In conclusion, we showed that WNT10A acts as an autocrine oncogene both in RCC carcinogenesis and progression by activating WNT/beta-catenin signaling.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据